are we not entitled to conclude

micevan1l6

The Guyana Public Service Union (GPSU) is of the view that the recent remarks by Minister of Business, Dominic Gaskin, could undermine negotiations on Public Service wages, salaries and allowances.During the recent Alliance For Change’s (AFC’) press briefing, Minister Gaskin shared his views on the 10 per cent salary increase which Guyana’s Public servants are slated to receive in October.Gaskin said that public servants are in fact, being paid a lot more than many persons who live in other developing countries, and while increases may not be considered sufficient, a livable wage is really dependent on how a person chooses to live.Minister Gaskin said “I think a 10 per cent increase certainly does increase spending power, it is 10 per cent more money.” He was at the time responding to questions about the Government’s final offer to public servants.But the GPSU says that the Minister’s statements are ill-informed and unnecessary.The Union in a release said that there appears to be no end to counterproductive interventions by officials of Government not directly involved in the ongoing negotiations with the Guyana Public Service Union (GPSU) on the issue of increased wages and salaries for Public Servants.Head of GPSU Patrick YardeBusiness Minister Dominic Gaskin“To seek to compromise these negotiations through periodic outbursts that are ill-informed and unnecessary as is unethical.”Indeed, the Union said that “we may now be inclined to ask whether or not the administration of President David Granger speaks with one voice on the issue of a living wage for Public Servants.”“That question arises from the awkward and insensitive interventions made, first, by Finance Minister Winston Jordan prior to the start of the negotiations (during which he appeared to want, unilaterally, to determine the extent of the increase that would result from the talks) and more recently by Minister of Business Dominic Gaskin.In other respects, the GPSU stressed that Minister Gaskin’s comments are both ill-informed and misleading.“The Minister appears less than properly informed of the outcome which the current wages and salaries negotiations seek to realize. Like his colleague Minister, he too advances the utterly fallacious notion that the optimal outcome of the talks has to do with (as he puts it) “what can be afforded.”Indeed, are we not entitled to conclude, therefore, that, somehow public servants are less entitled to adequate compensation for their efforts in service of the government than others who do so at much greater compensation, the issue of affordability notwithstanding?The Union therefore warned that at this juncture the GPSU wishes to say that the contempt for public servants “just cause” reflected   in the intermittent interventions being made by government officials not directly concerned with the wages and salaries negotiations, points to a reckless lack of concern for the importance of a convivial negotiating environment. There are, we believe, distinct dangers in continuing down this path.The initial proposal of the GPSU was for a 40% across-the-board increase for public servants. The union had also requested that allowances be included in the negotiations.However, the Government’s proposal took into consideration the fundamental need for a restructured Public Service which included the adjustment of scales for wages and salaries; the implementation of a merit increment system; and a resolution of the issue of bunching. It was pointed out to the union, that each of these would entail an additional cost to Government and result in increased earnings for Public Servants.